Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 21 May 2024 19:26:11 +0000
From: BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: "Open fields" doctrine
References: <v2iju7$mhk3$1@dont-email.me> <atropos-5BC912.11453721052024@news.giganews.com> <20240521150346.00002b2d@example.com>
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (Intel Mac OS X)
Date: Tue, 21 May 2024 12:35:44 -0700
Message-ID: <atropos-9316C1.12354421052024@news.giganews.com>
Lines: 48
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-8tbhfUHgZDp2J7OsTVn4w4VwNWEs5I/kNW0qv7qINA3rNPTLkIT/LB2v1IjFG3h+9W1mTyDi29uoSEF!eC7LWE6ZfZBLUGI1m8WsAc9J/YtP1OK7RwXirkfdHUXgmVVotoqaafe1eSZDYKJHCaEYGewl5BTA!Q2s=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 3434

In article <20240521150346.00002b2d@example.com>,
 Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 21 May 2024 11:45:37 -0700
> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article <v2iju7$mhk3$1@dont-email.me>,
> >  "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Recently, I started two different threads that addressed issues
> > > related to warrantless search and seizure. Other related concepts
> > > are the exclusionary rule and the extent to which this applies in
> > > criminal matters or certain civil matters as well. Furthermore, is
> > > there a relationship between warrantless search and seizure and the
> > > law of trespass?
> > > 
> > > The "plain view" doctrine wasn't at issue in these situations
> > > because the contraband or building code/zoning violation wasn't
> > > obvious without the trespass.
> > > 
> > > In one thread, the landowner lost on appeal. He had no expectation
> > > of privacy from drone overflights gathering evidence of code
> > > violations in a situation in which the landowner had previously
> > > agreed to comply with code but had never agreed to continuing
> > > inspections.
> > > 
> > > In another thread, the landowner won a partial victory in which
> > > state game wardens could not trespass to place wildlife cameras
> > > hoping to catch hunting violations.
> > > 
> > > Where does the landowner have an expectation of privacy? Where the
> > > "open fields doctrine" applies, he has no expectation of privacy.  
> > 
> > But a landowner does still have legal dominion and control over the 
> > property, so while he may not have a right to privacy in those open 
> > fields, he does have the legal right to evict trespassers as he finds 
> > them. So if he comes across a cop trespassing on his land, while he
> > may not have a privacy or 4th Amendment claim against the cop, he
> > does have the legal right to tell him to get the hell off his land.
> 
> Can the cop gather evidence on his way to the edge of the property,
> such as marijuana plants? What can the landowner do if the cop doesn't
> skedaddle promptly? Call the cops? Shoot the cop for trespassing?

It's happened before. Trespassing cops have found themselves looking 
down the barrel of a rifle, disarmed, and forcefully ejected from 
private property and when it was all sorted out, the landowner was held 
to be in the right.